WikiLeaks largest classified military leak - Page 5 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 11-30-2010, 01:08 PM   #81
Refugee
 
AliEnvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,320
Local Time: 02:32 AM
Assange anti-American?

His melodramatic spoon-feeding of the information complete with teaser tweets and requests for donations are as American as apple pie.

I suspect the wikileaks money trail would be more revealing than any of the classified info he's sharing.
__________________

AliEnvy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2010, 06:14 PM   #82
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,600
Local Time: 06:32 PM
WikiLeaks: Interpol issues wanted notice for Julian Assange

__________________

deep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2010, 08:23 PM   #83
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Canadiens1131's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,363
Local Time: 10:32 PM
That's the continuation of what I believe was two charges of sexual assault that were dropped in Sweden (charges jussssst after the war documents were leaked by the way), then re-instated by a higher-up in Sweden. To me it smelled really fishy at the time.

Whether this guy is a bastard or not, I have a feeling enough intelligence agencies will be conspiring to destroy his reputation over the next few months.
Canadiens1131 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2010, 09:23 PM   #84
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 66,266
Local Time: 09:32 PM
good.
Headache in a Suitcase is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2010, 10:03 PM   #85
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
mobvok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: boom clap
Posts: 4,435
Local Time: 06:32 PM
Link
Quote:
Gates on Leaks, Wiki and Otherwise
By ELISABETH BUMILLER

Defense secretary Robert M. Gates has regularly denounced Wikileaks in recent months for its massive disclosures, and as a former director of Central Intelligence he places high value on secrets.

But at a Pentagon briefing on Tuesday, Mr. Gates, who plans to retire next year, responded to a question about Wikileaks’ disclosure of 250,000 diplomatic cables by meandering down a different path.

Here is some of what he said:

“Let me just offer some perspective as somebody who’s been at this a long time. Every other government in the world knows the United States government leaks like a sieve, and it has for a long time. And I dragged this up the other day when I was looking at some of these prospective releases. And this is a quote from John Adams: ‘How can a government go on, publishing all of their negotiations with foreign nations, I know not. To me, it appears as dangerous and pernicious as it is novel.’

“Now, I’ve heard the impact of these releases on our foreign policy described as a meltdown, as a game-changer, and so on. I think those descriptions are fairly significantly overwrought. The fact is, governments deal with the United States because it’s in their interest, not because they like us, not because they trust us, and not because they believe we can keep secrets. Many governments — some governments — deal with us because they fear us, some because they respect us, most because they need us. We are still essentially, as has been said before, the indispensable nation.

“So other nations will continue to deal with us. They will continue to work with us. We will continue to share sensitive information with one another.

“Is this embarrassing? Yes. Is it awkward? Yes. Consequences for U.S. foreign policy? I think fairly modest.’’
Julian Assange, you will hang for your limp handshakes and uncomfortable eye contact. No one makes the US government feel awkward!

He and Bradley Manning can have committed an act of dubious ethics that would probably lead to jail time, while not being History's Next Monster.
mobvok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2010, 10:55 PM   #86
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: South Philadelphia
Posts: 19,218
Local Time: 10:32 PM
Why the fuck is the United States government keeping such careful watch on foreign leaders' mistresses?
PhilsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2010, 11:41 PM   #87
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 03:32 AM
Of course, if Robert Gates is right that even a leaky ship can sail in the symbiotic environment of international relations, then Assange's ironically conspiratorial scheming against a supposedly discrete, mechanistic "conspiracy" with discrete inputs and outputs is misguided.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2010, 12:58 AM   #88
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
mobvok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: boom clap
Posts: 4,435
Local Time: 06:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yolland View Post
Of course, if Robert Gates is right that even a leaky ship can sail in the symbiotic environment of international relations, then Assange's ironically conspiratorial scheming against a supposedly discrete, mechanistic "conspiracy" with discrete inputs and outputs is misguided.
Yeah, I agree with Gates' view that the incentives are what they are- anyone can intuit a reasonably accurate model for most nation's private actions through public facts. But I think Assange might respond that through the constriction of private information caused by leakers, the capability of the actors to potentially coordinate in an unjust (and consequently secret) way would be reduced.

Disregarding whether or not Assange's application is correct/moral/just/so forth/if I even understand it, I think the notion of examining how security/information and the "thinking power" of bureaucracy interact is an interesting lens to view the world.
mobvok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2010, 03:15 AM   #89
War Child
 
Inner El Guapo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 609
Local Time: 08:32 PM
He's a soldier. UCMJ:
"aiding the enemy"
Quote:
904. ART. 104. AIDING THE ENEMY
Any person who--
(1) aids, or attempts to aid, the enemy with arms, ammunition, supplies, money, or other things; or
(2) without proper authority, knowingly harbors or [protects or gives intelligence to or communicates or corresponds with or holds any intercourse with the enemy, either directly or indirectly;
shall suffer death or such other punishment as a court-martial or military commission may direct.
Clearly the UCMJ might consider this a 'punishable by death' situation.

If the Military can hang him for what he did, what difference does it make if someone wants to say this is treason? Legal semantics? Practically speaking, that's about all it is. If they want to execute him, they probably can.

Quote:
Originally Posted by yolland View Post
^ Not to mention, it wasn't another country he passed the information on to (well, and there wouldn't seem to be two witnesses, either). If he's successfully charged with anything, it will almost certainly be the unlawful downloading of classified data and sharing it with an unauthorized party, under military law.
Did he not literally pass the information to every country on the planet via the internet? Anyone with access to the IP could be a witness. I don't think people who share illegal music can get by with the ol' "someone else was using my computer"...excuse. I really don't have any idea. But the treason argument is probably neither here nor there anyhow (see above).
Inner El Guapo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2010, 03:38 AM   #90
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
mobvok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: boom clap
Posts: 4,435
Local Time: 06:32 PM
Well, the maximum potential charge has been set: they want 52 years in prison for the guy.

I say ultimately.....I dunno, 30 or 40 years, depending on whether Manning wants to/has info to give up on Wikileaks and Assange.
mobvok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2010, 04:05 PM   #91
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 03:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mobvok View Post
Well, the maximum potential charge has been set: they want 52 years in prison for the guy.

I say ultimately.....I dunno, 30 or 40 years, depending on whether Manning wants to/has info to give up on Wikileaks and Assange.
Exactly, Manning's already been charged. Not with "aiding the enemy," not even with espionage, but with violations of various Army and federal laws concerning the handling of classified data (specifically, UCMJ 92 as per Army Regulation 25-2 4-5(a)(3) and 4-6(k); and UCMJ 134 as per 18 USCode 793(e) and 18 USCode 1030(a)(1) and (2)--see the Army's charge sheet against Manning for details). WikiLeaks isn't an "enemy" since we aren't at war with them, and leaking classified information to the public, though technically illegal in its own right, is very different from relaying it (directly or indirectly) to the enemy--which is dangerous precisely because your own side doesn't know the enemy has the information, thus giving the enemy considerable strategic advantage.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2010, 05:06 PM   #92
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Canadiens1131's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,363
Local Time: 10:32 PM
Charging someone with "treason" for leaking documents to no one in particular would be fucking stupid. If he had made sure they ended up in Beijing ONLY, than sure, treason, but you can't go throwing "treason" and "terrorism" around.
Canadiens1131 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2010, 05:28 PM   #93
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London/Sydney
Posts: 6,609
Local Time: 03:32 AM
They're unloading on Russia tonight. That won't be pretty.
Earnie Shavers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2010, 06:35 PM   #94
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 03:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1131 View Post
Charging someone with "treason" for leaking documents to no one in particular would be fucking stupid.
Unfortunately, I think the discrepancy between the popular usage(s) of "treason," "treachery," "traitor," etc. and on the other hand their legal definitions (and history of interpretations in court) have created a lot of confusion. (For example, Ann Coulter's Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism...)



In continuation of my above post: as for Assange, over the last few days sources inside the DoJ have told the press that the government may be considering dusting off the Espionage Act of 1917 to use against him--that is, in the unlikely event they get their hands on him. (The Act, passed during the WWI-era Red Scare at a time when First Amendment press freedoms were considerably weaker than today, was billed as defense against pro-German traitors, but in practice was mostly used against left-wing critics of US participation in the War; it was highly controversial even at the time.) I hope they don't do this: the Act, which is far more vaguely worded than the standard current definition of espionage (10 USC 906A) regarding types of restricted information and the motives for soliciting and relaying it, could set a dangerous precedent for journalists publishing information passed along by 'Washington insiders' (often with Washington's blessing)--a routine staple of US journalism. It's unlikely this is anything more than a bluff--to succeed, the DoJ would not only have to show that sharing Manning's information proved Assange was either A) specifically seeking to injure the US or B) actively promoting insubordination within the military, but also, would most likely wind up having to release even more classified data to show that what he did release constitutes a verifiable threat. But if they do pursue this approach, given the possible implications for US journalism, it risks undermining the sincerity of their claims to be acting in 'the national interest'--much as Assange's release of these cables (save perhaps a couple), combined with the broader agenda suggested by his "manifesto," tends to undermine his image as a righteous whistleblower, bending or breaking the law insofar as it exposes true evil.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2010, 12:58 AM   #95
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 03:32 AM
New York Times, Dec. 1
Quote:
...A trove of diplomatic cables, obtained by WikiLeaks and made available to a number of publications, disclose a perception by American diplomats that Canadians “always carry a chip on their shoulder” in part because of a feeling that their country “is condemned to always play ‘Robin’ to the U.S. ‘Batman.’ ”

But at the same time, some Canadian officials privately tried to make it clear to their American counterparts that they did not share their society’s persistent undercurrent of anti-Americanism. In July 2008, Canada’s intelligence service director, James Judd, discussed a video showing a crying Omar Khadr, then a teenager and a Canadian detainee at the prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. Mr. Judd “observed that the images would no doubt trigger ‘knee-jerk anti-Americanism’ and ‘paroxysms of moral outrage, a Canadian specialty.’ ”

A cable that briefed President George W. Bush before a visit to Ottawa in late 2004 shed further light on the asymmetrical relationship with Canada—a country, the embassy wrote, that was engaged in “soul-searching” about its “decline from ‘middle power’ status to that of an ‘active observer’ of global affairs, a trend which some Canadians believe should be reversed.” It also noted that Canadian officials worried that they were being excluded from a club of English-speaking countries as a result of their refusal to take part in the 2003 invasion of Iraq. The United States had created a channel for sharing intelligence related to Iraq operations with Britain and Australia, but Canada was not invited to join. The Canadian government “has expressed concern at multiple levels that their exclusion from a traditional ‘four-eyes’ construct is ‘punishment’ for Canada’s nonparticipation in Iraq and they fear that the Iraq-related channel may evolve into a more permanent ‘three-eyes’ only structure,” the cable said.

Four years later, after President Obama’s election, the embassy reported that Canadian officials had a different potential irritant: Mr. Obama was far more popular in Canada than they were. The embassy also said Mr. Obama’s decision to make Ottawa his first foreign trip as president would “do much to diminish—temporarily, at least—Canada’s habitual inferiority complex vis-à-vis the U.S. and its chronic but accurate complaint that the U.S. pays far less attention to Canada than Canada does to us.”
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2010, 01:09 AM   #96
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
mobvok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: boom clap
Posts: 4,435
Local Time: 06:32 PM
Boy howdy there are a lot of Batman fans in our diplomatic corps.
mobvok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2010, 01:18 AM   #97
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 03:32 AM
I know! I think that's the third cable I've seen so far that used that analogy. Well, that's the generation they belong to I guess, it was certainly a great TV favorite when I was a kid.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2010, 01:40 AM   #98
Blue Crack Supplier
 
coolian2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Hamilton (No longer STD capital of NZ)
Posts: 42,934
Local Time: 03:32 PM
and in breaking news, the americans don't think highly of the canadians. when does the good stuff come out?
coolian2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2010, 05:48 AM   #99
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
mama cass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 6,293
Local Time: 03:32 AM
wow... interesting reading this thread... Assange is perceived as nothing short of a hero and whistleblower by many over this side of the pond from what i've seen while following the situation...

i for one will be boycotting Amazon for pulling the plug on the wikileaks site, even though they must've been put under enormous pressure to do so...

good on the guy i say - i hope he stays safe and these arseholes saying he "should be hunted down" are not taken seriously
mama cass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2010, 11:18 AM   #100
Refugee
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Tel-Aviv, Israel
Posts: 1,300
Local Time: 02:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mama cass View Post
wow... interesting reading this thread... Assange is perceived as nothing short of a hero and whistleblower by many over this side of the pond from what i've seen while following the situation...

i for one will be boycotting Amazon for pulling the plug on the wikileaks site, even though they must've been put under enormous pressure to do so...

good on the guy i say - i hope he stays safe and these arseholes saying he "should be hunted down" are not taken seriously
As one of those arseholes....and damm proud of it.....could you please explain to me why you don't think what he did was wrong.
__________________

AchtungBono is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×